Free will. Free market. What's so hard to understand about that?

Well, the South Carolina debate sure was a hoot, wasn’t it? I just love cat fights. But before the real fun began, Mrs. Clinton laid out her “economic action plan,” which consisted of the following six points.

“I would have a moratorium on foreclosures for 90 days…”

“I want to have an interest rate freeze for 5 years…”

“Then I think we need to give people about $650, if they qualify, to help pay their energy bills this winter….”

“I want to put money into clean energy jobs, green collar jobs,”

“and also make sure we have a fund that will help communities deal with the consequences of the home foreclosure crisis,”

What good will a 90 day moratorium on foreclosures really do? How many of the people who are unable to pay their mortgages today will suddenly get a huge promotion, a new job, or win the lottery within the next three months? Realistically, if their house is about to be foreclosed, delaying it for 90 days is not going to keep them from losing it. What it will do is give them 90 days free rent, where they can stop paying their bills because they know they’re going to lose the house anyway. And, during those 90 days, the house is no longer an “investment” for them, so they have no particular motivation to keep it up. In fact, many people in this situation feel a certain resentment toward the financial institution that’s “kicking them out of their home,” and some may even take it out on the property to get back at the villains who are “doing this to them.” I don’t see how this will help either the economy or the people who can’t pay their debts (beyond giving them 3 months free rent at the expense of the lenders).

And how will a five year interest freeze ultimately help the people who irresponsibly overextended their credit on homes they couldn’t afford? What happens when the freeze is lifted? Are we expected to anticipate that people who had to get sub-prime loans because they had bad credit to begin with will become any more financially savvy or fiscally responsible after having been bailed out for five years? What happens in five years when their interest rates jump up? They’ll be back in the same situation they’re in now. A problem deferred is not a problem solved.

And how exactly will this fund “help communities deal with the consequences of the home foreclosure crisis?” And who’s going to pay for it? We, the taxpayers, of course. The people who manage our finances responsibly will once again be asked to pony up for those who didn’t. No, not asked — the money we earned and saved and managed wisely will be taken out of our pockets to bail out the ones who figured they might as well risk it all because, if worse came to worst, the good old Fed would surely come to their rescue. The fiscally conservative individuals who decided the risk wasn’t worth taking are the ones who’ll get stuck paying the cost of the risks that others took.

Remember the story of the grasshopper and the ant? Well, the ants are tired of storing up food all year only to feed the grasshoppers when the grasshopper party is over. Grasshoppers, get a clue! The ants are fed up. Sometimes I think, instead of a donkey and an elephant, the party symbols ought to be a grasshopper and an ant.

ARMs were pushed heavily by the Bush Regime, especially Alan Greenspan, and I think that some of the blame and the cleanup of this whole housing market crisis should go to the federal govt. that encouraged these bad practices in the first place.

The banks that made all these unscruplious loans in the first place are mostly off the hook at this point. Usually after a loan is made to someone, the initial loanmaker sells that loan to some other entity and they (and we sometimes) end up getting left holding the bag. That’s what’s really wrong here IMO.

“What it will do is give them 90 days free rent, where they can stop paying their bills because they know they’re going to lose the house anyway. And, during those 90 days, the house is no longer an ‘investment’ for them, so they have no particular motivation to keep it up. In fact, many people in this situation feel a certain resentment toward the financial institution that’s ‘kicking them out of their home,’ and some may even take it out on the property to get back at the villains who are ‘doing this to them.'”

Sheesh…talk about not believing in the goodness of human nature. Thanx for proving my earlier point BTW.

What’s your solution then, let a good chunk of the economy go down the toilet and chaulk it up to experience?

Blame it on the government; blame it on the banks. Blame it on anybody except the irresponsible people who overextended their already bad credit.

Caveat emptor. It’s always the responsibility of the buyer to understand what they’re buying and whether they can afford it. If you believe what someone tells you because you want to believe it, even though common sense tells you otherwise, you’re only misleading yourself.

If a person borrows money he can’t pay pay back, that person is responsible for the bad decision that led to his losses. Blaming the other guy is just a way to avoid taking personal responsibility.

It’s a myth that people learn from their mistakes. People learn from the consequences of their mistakes. If you shield them from the consequences, not only don’t they learn the lesson they desperately need to learn, they learn the opposite — that it will all work out in the end.

The economy is going to suffer either way, — if not from the disease, then from the cure. Trying to manipulate the free market is a great way to invoke the law of unintended consequences…

So, we’ll just write off the thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of people that made some bad decisions, whether they were intentionally hoodwinked or not, and call it a day. A huge chunk of the economy of this country goes under, and that’s OK then. Sounds like a great plan…for disaster… At best, your position is very principled, but unpractical. Heartless really…”oh well, better luck next time”.

I saw some TV advertising the other week for a payday loan/personal loan that was at a rate of slightly above 99%. 99% interest!! There are actual gangsters in jail for loansharking that must be shaking their heads in disbelief. You see ads all the time for “buy a new home with no interest”, “pay off your bills by refinancing your home and only pay the interest off each month” (and end up *never* owning your own home), take a “reverse morgage old-timers and be secure for the future”. What’s the difference between doing any of that and me going around the corner to the old folks home and bilking the old ladies out of their meager finances?

The loan markets are way, way, way out of control IMO. The free market is not the answer for everything.

Well, Mr. Guy, I would advise you not to take out one of those loans. That is obviously not a wise choice. But I’m not your Daddy, so, as a responsible adult with free will, if you don’t want to heed my advice, and choose to take out one of those loans anyway, I can only shake my head at your lack of judgement.

But I will not pay your loan off for you when the bill comes due. You made the choice. If I protect you from the consequences of your poor judgement, at my own expense, you learn nothing and we are both poorer for it. If you pay the consequences, it may be very hard for you, and you may have to make many sacrifices to get yourself out of the mess you got into. But, the harder it is, the less likely you are to make the same mistake again.

“So, we’ll just write off the thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of people that made some bad decisions, whether they were intentionally hoodwinked or not, and call it a day. A huge chunk of the economy of this country goes under, and that’s OK then. Sounds like a great plan…for disaster… At best, your position is very principled, but unpractical. Heartless really…”oh well, better luck next time”.”

Heartless??? You want me to pay for their stupidity, and if I refuse, I’m heartless? Liberals make me vomit. It’s is so disgusting to hear these mindless lies repeated by so many idiots.

Alan Greenspan wasn’t part of the “Bush Regime”. He’s a hero of the Clinton administration if I remember correctly.

The only people responsible for this, are the people who didn’t understand the loan they were getting into and the banks that were stupid enough to loan money to a bad credit risk. I don’t want one dime of my money going to either one.

If they would just let the market handle this, home prices would come down to a more reasonable price, which would be a good thing for first time buyers. I would love for prices to drop because my property taxes would also drop.

[…] are victims of their personal greed and irresponsibility. Senator Clinton also desires to freeze subprime mortgage prices and impose a 90 day moratorium on foreclosures for the poor dears. And, earlier this week, Senator Clinton suggested that probably the government […]

[…] they’re victims of their own greed and irresponsibility. Senator Clinton also wants to freeze subprime mortgage rates and impose a 90 day moratorium on foreclosures for the poor dears. And, earlier this week, Senator Clinton suggested that perhaps the government […]